What does it mean to be successful in graduate school? Earn a degree? Acquire a particular skill set?

There is no clear-cut answer. A conversation with UW oceanographer John Delaney got me thinking: Do traditional notions of graduate school in the sciences produce the sorts of scientists that can effectively create knowledge and communicate with society?

Generally speaking, graduate school involves four components: coursework, research, qualifying exams and a thesis. Coursework develops expertise across a wide spectrum. Specialization is obtained via research into some scientific question. These studies are meant to be individualistic, wherein the students learn to do science themselves — though with the guidance of an adviser.

Qualifying exams verify the student is competent and capable of moving on with his or her program. Eventually the research question is answered — or abandoned in favor of another — and a thesis is written. Through this process, the student acquires the skill set expected of all scientists.

Not everyone agrees on what skills scientists should possess, nor on their value in relation to one another.

For example, communication with other scientists is accepted to be an integral part of the process of science. Communicating with the public is another matter. This idea arouses imagery of scientists hidden away in their labs, wary of connecting with the outside world. Some argue this is a reality to be accepted. Others counter that being able to communicate effectively with the public, the media and other scientists is a valuable skill.

In 2000, a National Science Foundation (NSF) advisory board recommended that the organization do more to increase public advocacy and communication with respect to science and engineering. It began by identifying a core issue.

"The public regards basic science as important and prestigious work that deserves significantly more public funding than it is getting," the report stated. "However, despite the fact that over 80 percent of the public has a generally positive reaction to science, only 4 percent of the public can correctly identify the National Science Foundation."

The board's response to the problem was to recommend collaboration between existing NSF programs focused on communication. Two actions advocated by the group still resonate today, precisely because they remain unfulfilled: 1) support training opportunities for increasing the active involvement of scientists and engineers in science communication, and 2) support graduate education initiatives that enhance media and public communication skills.

Lack of institutional support is disappointing, but perhaps more disconcerting is the fact that discussion of the philosophy of science is rare among graduate students. Many relish their specialization, withdrawing from more complex ideas that are best grasped through wider dialogue and engagement.

"It's all a question of balance," professor of oceanography LuAnne Thompson said.

Perspective is also important.

"A Ph.D. emphasizes the student's specific work, but that's not to say collaboration and outreach are unimportant. ... It depends on how you define the Ph.D."

Where the traditional paradigm is lacking, graduate scientists and engineers must take responsibility for their own development. The UW is a renowned, academically diverse campus, and graduate school is a great time to learn to communicate and collaborate. Student groups such as the Forum on Science, Ethics, and Policy (FOSEP) have recognized this, encouvraging dialogue among scientists and with the public. If you look closely, there are examples of proactive scientists vacross campus.

As graduate students continue to throw down their academic blinders in exchange for broader consideration of scientific ideals like active communication, institutional cultures will adapt and evolve. Such changes will only occur when students look past the rote requirements of their degrees, candidly consider what their education should entail and act to embody those ideals.

[Reach columnist Brian Smoliak at news@thedaily.washington.edu.]